What lessons can Toowoomba learn from Cyclone Debbie?

What lessons can Toowoomba learn from Cyclone Debbie?

YOUR SAY: With thousands of properties both in Queensland and NSW recovering or still affected by flooding in the wake of cyclone Debbie, perhaps it's time to review the lessons for the Toowoomba region.

The worst of the weather by-passed us - this time. The question is, "When will it be our turn to cop the lot?"

Our emergency and other services are fully and competently prepared for the worst they think nature can possibly throw at our communities, but we might also question if the Toowoomba Regional Council is also doing its part, especially for the long term.

The council should be congratulated for its documented acknowledgement of the potential implications of climate change and possible vagaries of the future.

It will therefore be interesting to see what decision it makes in the case of the current application to develop a block of land at Bradley St, Meringandan West (MCUI/2016/1418).

Historically zoned rural, the planning scheme was changed a year or so ago, to reclassify the block concerned as part of an "emergent community" zone. This opened the door for a Sustainable Planning Act S.242 application for preliminary approval allowing residential development.

The current application shows a suggested layout of 81 lots, although a more concentrated proposal could be applied for at a later date if a preliminary approval is granted.

The problem is, about 60% of the land is shown on the council's own Flood Risk Information Portal plan as being at risk of flooding. (pictured).

Although rated a "low" risk (on the basis of presently known climate patterns and upstream development - any unfavourable change could greatly increase the risk), there is nevertheless a clearly identified potential for flooding from the adjacent creek or overland drainage path that passes through the middle.

There have been more than 200 submissions from residents objecting to the proposal and while the council may be "one eyed" and arrogant enough to dismiss all these properly made submissions, it surely cannot ignore the flood risk it has itself identified and recorded?

It is clear that to approve this application would constitute a deliberate and wilful action by the council, unnecessarily exposing future ratepayers and their property, to risk of flooding.

Nationally we are constantly urged "If its flooded, forget it!".

The council has a responsibility to parallel that sentiment in its planning activities and resolve that "If its floodable, forget it!".